A clear democratic triumph for PARK Geun-hye, but who won the elections?

According to Mayans (solar calendar), the end of the world is for tomorrow, but in Korea (lunar calendar), MOON crashed yesterday.

Actually, MOON Jae-in never had the opportunity to take off*. AHN Cheol-soo did, but he blew it** (yeah, he eventually took off yesterday, but after casting his ballot, and at Incheon Airport, in a plane for the States).

So from the start, it's always been about PARK Geun-hye cruising towards a surprise-less win in a debate-free campaign against non-existent opponents.

Her victory is not a lackluster win, but a very clear democratic triumph. Yet I'm still wondering about who won the elections.



PGH's website this morning

Korean democracy chose an indisputable winner...

- a very strong turnout: 75.80%, the biggest since the 1997 clash between Kim Dae-jung and Lee Hoi-chang
- a clear majority: 51.6% vs 48.0% (NB: small candidates were really garden gnomes this time)
- reaching beyond the usual geographic divides: we didn't skip the traditional strongholds (MOON rocked Honam, scoring 86-89% in Jeolla and 91.97% in Gwangju, PARK claimed Yeongnam, with a 80.4% peak in Daegu), but color-wise, the map is very far from the 1997 or 2002 East v. West split, and much closer to LEE Myung-bak's 2007 landslide victory. MOON claimed Seoul back, but barely. PARK's victory seemed inevitable very early, when the first Sudogwon results showed her ahead in Incheon and Gyeonggi-do, and very close to MOON in the capital city. Note that Korean expats voted 56-42 in favor of MOON.
- and even beyond the expected generational divides: yes, seniors massively voted PARK, but she didn't fare that bad at the other end of the spectrum, with one third of the youngest voters. And who ruled in social networking? The seniors, who literally kakaotalked each other to a whopping 90% participation rate.
 

 

... but who won these elections?...

For international observers, the big news is a combination of two events: a woman becomes President of the Republic of Korea for the first time, and the Korean democracy elects the offspring of a former dictator.

But I don't think the key issue in Korea was gender, or a referendum for or against PARK Chung-hee. And of course, I know constitutional values were not "top of mind". To me, it was about fears, uncertainties, and change.

And conservatism won.

Everybody knew that the situation was bad, and that something needed to be done. Both candidates promised similar reforms (less power for chaebols, more welfare for the powerless), but both inspired doubts: PARK regarding the balance of powers, MOON because his party was not ready to govern. And even when voters projected themselves in a country ruled by their own champion, they felt uncertain for the future. Fear clearly prevailed over hope, and both MOON and PARK spent their time reassuring voters - at this little game, conservatism usually wins.

And PARK followed the script perfectly, positioning herself as a mother for all citizens, softening her stance on reforms (like: yes chaebols have too much power, but in time of crisis you cannot weaken the drivers of our economy). And as usual, she never gave the impression of speaking her own mind, always calculating her words, always speaking with the voice of the wary, risk-averse but confident ajumma.
 
So Koreans chose change without change, and the ruling party will keep ruling. But the official leader has really changed. LEE Myung-bak received a clear mandate for reforms, and he had credentials as a doer and a leader. PARK Geun-hye's more into backstage politics, and the only reforms she's carried out so far are rebranding her own party, replacing a few extra actors, and wishing very hard that corruption would stop***.

But PARK Geun-hye's been here forever, and everybody knows her story. She didn't chose to be the daughter of a dictator, and you can't expect a kid whose parents got murdered to grow into an adult like all others. She eventually distanced herself from her dad's regime, and she has no risks of favoring kids of her own since she doesn't have any. Bonus: unlike her predecessor, she (officially at least) doesn't run for any religious group. So why not give her a chance? Even if she only criticized her dad indirectly, reluctantly, and faintly. Even if, to this day, we still don't know what she truly thinks. Even if we can't tell if she's running her own show.

Yesterday, when her time to shine came, PARK Geun-hye somehow managed to dodge the call again. She certainly didn't deliver an inspiring acceptance speech: only a few word at her headquarters to announce that she'd go to Gwanghwamun... where she didn't take the stage but received a bouquet before answering a quick victory interview. KIM Yu-na style. The scene should have taken place in Seoul Plaza with the ice rink  in the background instead of King Sejong's statue.

So who stole the TV show yesterday? Gwanghwamun, CHUNG Mong-joon, and Anipang.

. Gwanghwamun? On her way back to Cheong Wa Dae, PARK left her Gangnam base to pause at party HQ, and ultimately Gwanghwamun, the gate to the main palace. All symbols of power were covered, but if anyone doubted it it's now official: Gwanghwamun has reclaimed its status as the ultimate symbol of power for Seoul and Korea. Special mention for King Sejong: his statue seemed to overpower the new president when she made her quick apparition, and his name has also become a political prize in itself (Sejong City, not yet a symbol of power, but the latest province-level, special self-governing city).

. CHUNG Mong-joon? Like King Sejong but sans the smile, he remained seated and silent all the time, yet his giant meditative face dominated the screen. PARK's short presence not even a distraction.

. Anipang? I didn't watch an election night on TV but a silly video game with a screen split between neat rows of Saenuri and DUP characters, and cute PARK and MOON animations reacting to the scores. And when I say "scores", it's just the plain, basic count of votes. The only humans you see are non-expert TV presenters announcing lists of results. Forget about analysis. Forget about pundits and spin rooms. Forget about exit polls telling differences in segments or motivations. It's just a stupid TV show, a countdown where the aim of the game is to guess at what time we have an official winner. I zapped through all the channels and they all did the same, competing only on their 3D animations. They all tried cute things, like that big giant teddy bear walking across Korea (straight from Tottoro), except SBS, which dared a weird concept, travelling through a derelict Korean village abandoned after a war, almost like a shoot'em up scene after all players are gone. Here's newsY's take at Moon discovering his score:




Now what?

In other words: we haven't seen nor learned anything so far. Neither during the campaign, nor afterwards.
 
And we have to give PARK Geun-hye the benefit of the doubt.
 
It's up to her (or to the people who drive the vehicle) to decide where to lead the nation, and what kind of final legacy she wants her family to leave.
 
Let's see how this blank page evolves.

And how history is being written. Including and particularly the past, in school textbooks. 

(originally published on Seoul Village as "The Anipang Election: PARK wins big, but who wins?")
(egalement sur blogules en V.F.: "De quoi PARK Geun-hye est-elle le nom?")


blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!! and Twitter (@stephanemot, @blogules)
*  see "Time is up"
** see "Scratch that: Dynasty, Dallas, or the Twilight Zone?"
*** see "25 years later"
****  see "Saenuri, a brand "new" wor(l)d"

2012 Presidential Elections in France - It's not the economy, stupid

In 2011, America discovered that helping a young democracy could result in a new theocracy. France tried that too, back in 1776, and as of today, the result is still unclear: the President of the United States pledges allegiance on a Bible, finishing with a vibrant "so help me God", and he would never dare ending a speech without godblessamericaing the audience urbi et orbi, for fear of being considered Un-Amerikan. In this presumably model democracy, all Greenbacks are tagged with the words "in God we trust", Satanists are better considered than atheists because at least they believe in fallen angels, and self-proclaimed 'republicans' would rather be represented by a Christian ayatollah (Santorum) than a moderate Mormon (Romney).

Technically, mixing religion with politics is not compatible with democratic and republican ideals, and I already explained how, in France, putting secularism at the core of the Constitution was meant to secure both democracy and the freedom of religion, and how that fragile balance was undermined as Nicolas Sarkozy followed George W. Bush's dangerous path (see "France, secularism and burqa : a political issue, not a religious one").

Of course, the French democracy was threatened long before Bush or Sarko came to power. And the 'laicite' and 'egalite' dogmas didn't succeed in a truly multicultural / multicultual society.

Anyway. Back in 2007, I voted Sarkozy because France needed reforms, and only he could deliver. I didn't trust the man, but somehow counted on the vast majority of UMP lawmakers to prevent him from breaking his very formal pledge to respect the French brand of secularism. Of course, Sarkozy implemented only a small part of the necessary reforms, and broke his pledge. He followed Bush's missteps to the tiniest detail, undermining the delicate balance of powers at all levels (executive, legislative, justice, media, religion...).

I can't imagine how low the French economy would have dived had Segolene Royal won the 2007 elections, but we would probably be very glad to maintain double A ratings. Yet unlike most his European counterparts who got the pink slip following the (first) depression, Sarkozy will not be judged by the economy: he simply cannot be re-elected because he betrayed the nation.

His main rival, Francois Hollande, also happens to be an impostor. He even received a boost from Sarkozy, who believed he could play the same trick as in 2007: I have my friends in the media push a weak and hollow candidate (then Hollande companion Segolene Royal), I vampirize the extreme-right with preemptive strikes in the no-man's land between 'law and order' and outright fascism, and I leverage my reputation as a doer.

Hollande is not as weak and hollow as he seems to be: he shares some of the key 'qualities' that helped his model, Francois Mitterrand, reach the top... only not the qualities leftist voters wished he had. And unsurprisingly, the worst enemy of Hollande happens to be Mitterrand's archrival Michel Rocard.

Traditionally, the French have their hearts on their left, but their wallets on their right, so they tend to vote for a center-right candidate. Fourty years ago, Mitterrand, a conservative with an ambiguous Vichy background, highjacked the Socialist party and managed to build an artificial platform where the Communists brought the votes needed to claim the Elysee Palace. Rocard, the reformer who dreamt of transforming a patchworked party into a modern social democrat powerhouse, was sidelined before witnessing, helplessly, his side fail miserably each time it claimed victory (most notably: ill timed, ideology driven 'reforms' in the early eighties or late nineties).

Holland lacks experience in governments, but he already proved his inability and unwillingness to reform the Socialist Party when he was Secretary General. Worse, instead of seizing the momentum when he finally was chosen as the party champion, he opted for yet another impossible consensus. Needless to say, his majority is bound to fail.

So the choice for those 2012 elections is clear: continuity, alternation, or change.
- Continuity means Nicolas Sarkozy and a moral collapse.
- Alternation means Francois Hollande and a deeper decline for French economy and politics.
- Change means either Marine Le Pen and the Front National, a French Revolution for the worse, or Francois Bayrou and the MoDem, a bet on the ability to build a national alliance government with moderate reformers from both sides.

Back in 2007, I hesitated between Bayrou and Sarkozy: the former would have made a good and fair president, but he didn't have the capacity to reform. Now France could be ready for a less partisan approach. Furthermore, a Bayrou victory would necessarily lead to the much needed reforms of both the Parti Socialiste and the UMP. The PS remains one of the few dinosaurs sticking to XIXth century politics, and the UMP needs to discard un-republican (no cap letter, please) elements from its platform.

The worse is that even top members from both leading parties are not enthusiastic about their own champions:
- socialist 'elephants' know Hollande is a fake but the right has never been that weak ahead of a Presidential election (even the Senate sports a socialist 'pink'), and nice positions are up for grabs in the government
- UMP leaders know Sarko doesn't stand a chance, and they already prepare for 2017 and the ineluctable failure of Hollande. Francois Fillon plans to conquer Paris and to capitalize on a strong performance as PM, while Jean-Francois Cope shamelessly carves himself into a Sarkozy mini-me.

Compared to Nicolas Sarkozy's, Barack Obama's reelection bid almost looks like a stroll in the park: both performed relatively well on the economic front, but the POTUS can put much more blame on the opposition, including during his tenure (after the 'sound economy of 2008', last year's budget mess...), and the Republican Party is even more divided, ideologically crippled, inconsistent, and unfit to govern than the French Socialist Party.


blogules 2012
Since 2003, nonsensical posts about noncritical issues in nonenglish (get your blogules transfusion in French)
NEW: join blogules on Facebook!!!

FCC : another hot potato for the Congress

2010 - A regulator that fails to regulate may need some fixing.

After being awarded the right to deregulate broadband by a Supreme Court ruling in 2005 on the ground that it would not be a telecom service but an information service, the FCC allowed broadband subs to plug whatever hardware or software they pleased to their access, but after that ordered ISPs to fight against peer-to-peer abuses. Comcast logically sued and won the case at a federal court.

That same FCC has also been working on a much advertised National Broadband Plan which now appears to be left to its own devices.

The only way out of this farcical situation would be for lawmakers to restore some regulatory power, a move that could prove unpopular for partisans of freedom on the liberal front (no regulation for the internet : that's fascism) as well as on the libertarian side (no regulation whatsoever : that's socialism). If Obama thought he was done with ideological battles between health care madness and financial reforms, here's yet another hot potato to catch before mid-term elections.

blogules 2010

J Street : It's Time

It's time for moderates to speak up and denounce impostors.

It's time for Palestinian and Israeli democrats to say no to radicals who keep torpedoeing peace and undermining their own camps.

J Street is running a full page ad in the NYT to remind opinion leaders that a majority of Jews in the US think "it's time for Israel to stop allowing extremist settlers and their sympathizers to endanger not only the friendship of the United States, but also the very future of Israel"*.

J Street also sends a message to AIPAC : now that Obama's healthcare reforms have passed, the politics of fear cannot rule the agenda until next elections. Change must come to the Middle East, with full support from the US, but also from Israeli citizens who reject as false the choice between their security and their ideals**.

blogules 2010

* see "Our Full-Page Ad in the New York Times"

** see "Israel accepted as true the choice between its security and its ideals"

The unlosable race

Martha Coakley just conceded Massachusetts senate race to Scott Brown. Big Pharma stocks anticipated the "good news".

Democrats lose their filibuster-proof 60 seat majority ahead of the mid-term elections, lose face big time, and lose Ted Kennedy for good.

MA is now a laughingstock next to Lieberman's CT. BTW now that we don't need Joe The Switcher that badly, let's leave him palling around with fellow theocons.

Obama, who campaigned for Coakley*, will have a tough time carrying healthcare reforms now. But least he is allowed to make a difference in Haiti.

Who knows ? US voters committed so many political suicides before, it could make sense for them to blame the firemen and long for the arsonists... and we may not have seen all of it ! Maybe they miss Cheney and company.

If you can't cast a ballot correctly, at least donate for Haiti.

blogules 2010


* and probably dreamed of a more kennedyesque "happy birthday, Mr President"

We didn't come here to fear the future. We came here to shape it

"We didn't come here to fear the future. We came here to shape it".

That's a good definition of what politics should be all about, and a perfect punchline for a speech on reforms.

So forget about "fear politics" and embrace "shape politics". Fitter, smarter, trendier, evolutive, creative... what else is in a word ?

Images, maybe. The shape of John McCain's nervous rictus as he was reminded how much he shared with his friend Ted Kennedy on health care. The shape of Nancy Pelosi's nervous smile as she tried to stand up at the right moments to get a few claps from the public option loving liberal part of the audience.

And the audience was tense, alright. The man in charge was telling them : It's not about me, Barack Hussein Obama, it's about you. I can run the country, but YOU can't hide. I'm doing my job, just do yours.

And oh. I'm keeping my eye on the ball : "we reject as false the choice between our social security and our ideals"


blogules 2009

India : no change means change

Congress Party claimed victory in the Indian election marathon, strengthening the positions of Manmohan Singh, party leader Sonia Gandhi and even her son Rahul Gandhi. A crushing desillusion for radicals from the nationalists and fundamentalist sides.

Yes, moderates can win. Even after Mumbai*. Even after a Bush-Cheney victory at the 2009 Israeli elections.

Maybe Indians are smarter and wiser than Israeli. Maybe they are simply more sensitive to demagogy that promises a more humane development instead of demagogy that promises more inhumane treatments. Go figure.

Mir Hossein Mousavi Khamenech is definitely smarter and wiser than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. A reformer with the experience of a conservative war Prime Minister, he would get rid of Iran's Moral Police, restore some basic women's rights, open the media to private entrepreneurs, and put the country back on the diplomatic map. A poor score of Hezbollah in upcoming elections in Lebanon could be a good sign for reform in Iran.

Stability and calm in such big countries as India and Iran could radiate around, even as Pakistan and Sri Lanka threaten to fuel future fires while crushing Taliban or Tamil Tigers.

We've been used to electoral calendars overwhelmed with bad news and this year already provided its share, but should the trend be confirmed, even Israel would be forced to reconsider its suicidal stance.


* see "Lessons from Mumbai ?"

Sarah Palin and the Segolene Royal Syndrome - The GOP on the same path as the French Socialist Party

The long overdue implosion of the GOP (see "GOP : time to split") has started.

McCainiacs are as dead as their leader. They are the only Americans who'd love to see their country in the position of the underdog, who believe a suicidal planecrasher can fix the damage he himself contributed to cause, and who think a man who pledged allegiance to George W. Bush can't follow the same dangerous path.

Paleocons, as usual, have nowhere to go. They keep roaming the vast plains, grazing aimlessly and wondering which one of them will survive all the others.

Reaganians don't want the party to remain under the dark Bush-Cheney umbrella, and the smartest of them are now supporting Barack Obama, a strong but cool leader with great ambitions for America and the power to change the world.

Reformers, the future of the party, need to look for each other and start building something together. The most difficult task will be to find a leader. Romney lost a big chunk of his credibility courting traditionalists and theocons.

Speaking of which.

Sarah Palin is claiming Bush's thecon fellowship as well as Cheney's neocon legacy, the very combo which ruined and disgraced America. She has the convictions and stamina, but no substance whatsoever.

Palin may become USA's Segolene Royal : an ambitious person more focused on her own self, or rather fascinated by her own Candidate avatar, and unable to lead a massive flock of followers in any consistent direction.

Just like in France, where Nicolas Sarkozy orchestrated in the media the rise of Segolene Royal, her victory at the 2006 PS primaries, and her mediatic come back earlier this year, the confirmation of Sarah Palin as a major figure would prevent her own party from evolving towards a much needed cultural revolution, and strengthen the other party.

It's definitely time to split for the GOP. True Republicans should let this theocon circus spin off and focus on what truly matters : what does this country need and how can they help ?

Right now, the best thing to do is obviously to vote for Obama.

---
Addendum 20081101 - Sarah Palin Got Pranked (Canadian pranksters impersonating Sarkozy and making a fool of her big time) :

Between reforms and indulgences - Blair and Sarkozy

I'd like to point out two key moves made by Tony Blair during his life. Two decisive acts of allegiance that may well explain a third one ; the most famous - allegiance to Bush and his suicidal crusade in Iraq. These two events didn't happen during his PM mandates but set a perfect frame around them :

- the first act of allegiance ? before taking power, and actually in order to take it : Blair made a pact with a curious devil named Ruppert Murdoch

- the second act of allegiance ? not long after leaving power : Blair clinched a deal with the most controversial Pope since WWII, to embrace the ultraconservative Roman Catholicism Benedict XVI dreams of restoring fundamentalism

As far as economy is concerned, Blair and Murdoch symbolise reforms and conservatism, but what strikes me most about Blair is the gap between his very pragmatic sense of reform and his very utopic mysticism... and Murdoch is not only obsessed by money but by the success of candidates with a messianic touch. This Citizen Kane didn't succeed with Pat Robertson in the late 80s, but earned his reputation of serial kingmaker with Tony and Dubya.

You want to keep an eye on Nicolas Sarkozy, a great admirer of Tony Blair the Reformer and Murdoch the Entrepreneur, a great friend of George W. Bush the Leader, a great echo to Ratzinger's theories about genetic determination or Europe's Christian heritage...

Hillary vs anyone = Bloomberg 2008 ?

Over one year ago, I predicted a candidacy of Segolene Royal in France would be the best opportunity for center hopeful Francois Bayrou. Sego eventually did get her chance, but Bayrou blew his own.

I've been telling the same about Michael Bloomberg for a while : should Hillary Clinton prevail in the Primaries and run without Obama, the mayor of New York could win as an independent. Except this time, the man would deliver.

Don't get me wrong. I'm mentioning "the man" and not "the male", and the fact that both Royal and Clinton are female is a pure coincidence. There was clearly a question of character and competence for Royal*, whilst Clinton mainly suffers, more or less unfairly, from a popularity problem.

I'm quite sure Bloomberg waits for the outcome of the Democratic race. Should he bring a new, disruptive face as a Veep**, he would gain momentum within weeks. Heck : for all you know, he could hire the best team. Not as a candidate, but as the head of a non partisan administration.

The US are ripe for a telluric change in politics. This is no more about Elephants vs Donkeys but about forward looking and humanists vs conservative and determinists. And consider "conservative" and "determinist" at the literal sense of the term : a hardcore liberal can be ultra conservative and an ayatollah of free trade as determinist as a radical Hegelian.

Bloomberg is by no means the perfect man. Yet he does stand a chance and he could make a change.

Anyway, I believe both Obama and Hillary can deliver great presidencies. And I sincerely hope whoever wins will actually reach across the aisles to make a sustainable difference.

What America needs now is not alternance from Reps to Dems but from offside politics to noble politics, from the negation of the republic and of democracy to the essence of republic and democracy.


* see my not so kind blogules on her in French.

** I mean someone coming out of the blue, not out of the Grand Old Blue Party.

Sarko wins - White blogule to reforms

France eventually said yes to something. After saying no to extreme right in 2002 and no to Europe in 2005, the country decided to embrace reforms. In order to implement his ambitious program, Nicolas Sarkozy must now get a clear majority at the National Assembly. And these legislative elections will be a very interesting moment in French politics.
As early as next thursday, Francois Bayrou will know whether his new Democratic Movement can keep the bulk of today's UDF MPs, who supported Sarkozy and refused to join the opposition.
As early as yesterday night, a surrealistic replay of the PS primaries started. Segolene Royal, as expected, refused to admit her own failure and the failure of ideological indecisiveness, claimed the leadership of the "anything but Sarko" movement. Laurent Fabius, as expected, denounced her solo campaign and called for unity with the left of the left. Dominique Strauss-Kahn, as expected, denounced the candidate's hollowness and the party's refusal to reform itself, to clarify its vision and ideology, calling for a reform towards a modern social democracy.
As early as yesterday night too, extreme left revolutionary groups tested the authorities, provoking minor episodes of violence in some major cities. Olivier Besancenot intends to take the street and bar all reforms.
As early as yesterday afternoon, Jean-Marie Le Pen died politically. Sarkozy shot him badly before the first round, leading a great chunk of his voters back to the republic, and the old extremist leader shot himself before the second round, calling his voters for a massive abstention but witnessing the highest turnout in recent history.
Meanwhile, Sarko rises above the snake nest and takes a few days off to abandon his candidate's skin. He already switched to a presidential posture in a rather brilliant speech. He talked to the world (to the notable exceptions of the Middle East and Asia) and mentioned respect. I'll keep an eye on his way of respecting the separation of powers (executive-legislative, executive-judicial, executive-media, temporal-intemporal...).

White blogule to France's wake up call

You keep asking me what's going wrong with France these days, especially after my critics on Amerika's social collapse (ie "This is America" or "Quagmires and bayous").
My answer is : "about everything". The poor are getting poorer, the masses are getting poor and the wealthy have already left the country. The IMF can praise the government's ability to perform reforms through consensus, the country needs to go further and quicklier.
First, "social" investments are often diverted / perverted and France is paying for the so called "social peace" : I give favors to social activists in order to buy stability, but I transform them into new elites disconnected from their bases and only devoted to the protection of their own interests. The counterproductivity of this tradition of compromises becomes all the more evident than growth times are over.
Second, ethnical / racial "égalité" is a myth. The French national soccer team became the "black blanc beur" alibi for a nation of tele-spectators / non-actors. Decision makers and opinion leaders must reflect the country's diversity.
Third, the Republic kept clinging to an ideal image of itself without actually taking care of itself. It must revive its own dynamics and instead of protecting yesterday's, we must unleash the locomotives of tomorrow. Education remains to be truly reformed (beyond the content, the mindframes and inerties).
The solutions lie in both a "bottom up" and "top down" approach. Bottom up : voting, getting involved in the community beyond one's own existing circles, marketing a positive peer-pressure at the individual as well as the entrepreneurial level (I'm doing something, how about you ?). Top down : transfering investments in the socially productive hands and giving back the ability to spend to the doers and makers : saving the budget by replacing only half of the new pensionners in the civil sector, luring back the wealthy - even if unethically at the start, ie through amnisty (but with a reform of heritage in favor of productive investments and socially efficient foundations).
This crisis could prove to be the opportunity to wake the country up and to focus the energies on the right priorities.
The only positive output of this "annus horribilis" (no to Europe, no to Paris 2012, no to social exclusion...) is the existence of a genuine debate. At very last, the key issues are outspoken. To the point one could talk about a 1968 revival, with still the same idealists at one extreme and cynists at the other one, but a stronger and more mature mainstream in-between.
Let's hope France will go for the structural change instead of Sarkozy's radical reformism. One year from now, I hope we can measure the evolution in the good (if not right) direction.

Red blogule to Junichiro Koizumi - Too right to be right

I did wish Japan's PM good luck for his 9/11 elections, provided he would actually seize the opportunity and get rid of the country's extremists. The fact is I'm not even surprised Koizumi nominated a few of them in his government, especially at such key positions as Foreign Affairs.
I actually finished that white blogule by a rather pessimistic "on the other hand, if he didn't seize such an opportunity, I wonder what could save Japan".
I can now complete this bright red blogule by a totally realistic Nothing can save Japan because Japan doesn't want to be saved.

White blogule to Japan's 9/11

Junichiro Koizumi pretends to be the last samurai, sending assassins to get rid of reformophobic politicians and lashing by himself the throats of the Empire's most dangerous thugs : the infamous postmen.
Well. The least one could say is I'm not a supporter of his, but I wish him luck.
If he loses, the old guard wins : even if the LDP ended up in shatters, nothing would change since the opposition is already welcoming hardliners and so called "rebels" on board.
If he wins, the old guard may still win. That is if Koizumi maintains his suicidal revisionist agenda.
What if Weirdo Hairdo Junichiro actually played the bad boy just to please Hirohito fanatics, and simply got rid of them after the elections ? What if his seppuku diplomacy were to end right after the 9/11 elections ? Imagine the winner over the ruins of the conservative fortress, asking the ultimate forgiveness for the crimes of a whole nation, accepting the past, enlightening the present and embracing the future...
On the other hand, if he didn't seize such an opportunity, I wonder what could save Japan.

Red blogule to propaganda - How much for a journalist ?

How to tell the difference of wealth between an American and an Iraqi ? The price of a Big Mac ? You'd better check the value of the journalist in the commodities section :
. in DC and in the heat of the Presidential campaign, the Bush administration paid columnist Armstrong Williams $240,000 to have him praise the successes of educational reforms on the TV
. in Baghdad and in the heat of the campaign, Allawi offered $100 to all journalists showing up at a campaign press conference (read FT's Allawi group slips cash to reporters)
A 2,400:1 ratio ??? Keep working on it if you want to catch up with your model democracy, King Dubya's banana republic of the divided states of america. Stephane MOT